Why do Suzukis handle so well?

[Lelandjt]

In every MX shootout of the last decade they always say the Suzuki is the best turning bike and can cut inside of all the others, why? Does it have a steeper head tube angle range or different offset than the others? How much do the head tube angles vary between brands? Fork offsets? Is the position of the engine weight at play here? Is the footpeg to rear axle distance range pretty close between brands?

It just seems that by changing front and rear sag, sliding the forks up and down, sliding the rear axle forward and back, and with adjustable footpegs any bike could be set up with the same geometry/handling characteristics.

Edited February 5, 2012 by Lelandjt

[Tha Breeze]

Anyone can make a bike have those same numbers as the next bike (sag, offset, etc.) What sets bikes apart is the frame geometry or in better words the stiffness of the frame at different areas. And yes, engine placement also plays a role in the balance of it.

[nickmell]

I have a 2006 rm250. It is the worst handling bike I have ever rode I hate it. Ever turn it acts different. One it will push, the next it will high side the next you will be out through the woods because the damn thing wont turn or stop.

[Lelandjt]

Is this something that's just stuck in the heads of magazine testers? Do they feel obligated to say RMs trun great becasue it's been repeated endlessly for a decade?

[IBeInNC]

^ That's my theory.

[SlowDinoDog]

Judging dirt bike handling characteristics is very subjective. Our preconceived knowledge and experience always influences our new subjective opinions.

Also, tires, suspension set-up, personal preferences, and ground conditions vary from ride to ride and make a big difference. It's also difficult to make small comparative judements when the rides are separated in time.

It's amusing to read how the supposed "expert" opinions are debunked when they give their opinions on engine strength and power profile and they are directly contradicted by objective dyno test results.

[RM125rc]

less rake from what ive always understood. i love how my 05 rm250 handles. i had a 01 yz250 before and it was more of a point and shoot type of riding. next to eachother the rm has the front wheel closer in to the frame if that makes sence

[jjhubbard15]

they usually have mellow power which also makes cornering more predictable, and theyre usually a bit more rigid (heavy) works for me im on my 3rd zuki

[tribalbc]

I have a 2006 rm250. It is the worst handling bike I have ever rode I hate it. Ever turn it acts different. One it will push, the next it will high side the next you will be out through the woods because the damn thing wont turn or stop.

Wow, I don't think I've ever heard that said of a RM.

Personally I don't think anything turns as well as a Suzuki. You do lose some straight line stability with it...

You are right the stock brakes need work.

[jcat]

I have a 2006 rm250. It is the worst handling bike I have ever rode I hate it. Ever turn it acts different. One it will push, the next it will high side the next you will be out through the woods because the damn thing wont turn or stop.

Try resetting your sag/stagger front to rear. I bought my bike from a local pro who had the susp. set for MX, and when I softened the forks for woods it upset the bike something bad. I then went and reset the rear and it carves again, which tells me the balance in sag front to rear is critical. Just what worked for me.

[RCN4HIM]

I have a 2006 rm250. It is the worst handling bike I have ever rode I hate it. Ever turn it acts different. One it will push, the next it will high side the next you will be out through the woods because the damn thing wont turn or stop.

?????????????????

Are you sure you have a RM?

[RenoRider324]

I have an 06 RMZ 450 and I can say this is the best turning bike I have ever ridden, You can throw it into a turn and it will shred through it.

[RCN4HIM]

I have an 06 RMZ 450 and I can say this is the best turning bike I have ever ridden, You can throw it into a turn and it will shred through it.

Me too... I rode a 07,08,09 YZF 450, a 11 KXF 450, and a bunch of CRF 450's last season and nothing corners like my RMZ...

[Save_A_Tree_Eat_A_Beaver]

Do they? Depends on what you are doing with it I guess....there's a reason why there will be only 5-6 Yellow bikes out of 300 entries at a desert race.

[Lelandjt]

^Well yeah, good turning and high speed stability are usually mutually exclusive.

[scottiesbe]

In every MX shootout of the last decade they always say the Suzuki is the best turning bike and can cut inside of all the others, why? Does it have a steeper head tube angle range or different offset than the others? How much do the head tube angles vary between brands? Fork offsets? Is the position of the engine weight at play here? Is the footpeg to rear axle distance range pretty close between brands?

It just seems that by changing front and rear sag, sliding the forks up and down, sliding the rear axle forward and back, and with adjustable footpegs any bike could be set up with the same geometry/handling characteristics.

More like since 1982 ..

[BlackCR25098]

What I love is how "it's the bike's fault" most of the time. You see these guys on here like this:

I have a 2006 rm250. It is the worst handling bike I have ever rode I hate it. Ever turn it acts different. One it will push, the next it will high side the next you will be out through the woods because the damn thing wont turn or stop.

and you just know, it's not the bike....lol I would know best as I've learned to ride my 98 cr250 pretty fast. My bike is a perfect example of a "rejected" style bike that was suppose to be un-rideable, yet it 98 was a winning year for Honda, and here I am loving every minute of it.

The RM's probably have less rake (opposite of a chopper) where the wheel is close in and that helps cornering, but you lose some high speed stability. That's a primary reason, and all the way down to a secondary reason, like tires...Learn to ride nickmell! lol

[Save_A_Tree_Eat_A_Beaver]

What I love is how "it's the bike's fault" most of the time. You see these guys on here like this:

and you just know, it's not the bike....lol I would know best as I've learned to ride my 98 cr250 pretty fast. My bike is a perfect example of a "rejected" style bike that was suppose to be un-rideable, yet it 98 was a winning year for Honda, and here I am loving every minute of it.

The RM's probably have less rake (opposite of a chopper) where the wheel is close in and that helps cornering, but you lose some high speed stability. That's a primary reason, and all the way down to a secondary reason, like tires...Learn to ride nickmell! lol

Hey Speedy Gonzales have you ever entered a race? .......to get a feeling of what "pretty fast" is compared to others? You might be in for a surprise when you get smoked by a kid on an 80 or an old fat guy on an XL 600.

Ever heard Kurt Caselli or Ryan Villopoto claim how great of a rider they are on a message board? Nope I havent either.

[BlackCR25098]

Hey Speedy Gonzales have you ever entered a race? .......to get a feeling of what "pretty fast" is compared to others? You might be in for a surprise when you get smoked by a kid on an 80 or an old fat guy on an XL 600.

Ever heard Kurt Caselli or Ryan Villopoto claim how great of a rider they are on a message board? Nope I havent either.

lol smh

You only hear what you want to, and then turn it into some half assed instigating argument about being "fast". Ever seen villopoto or casselli troll around on an internet forum? Me neither. It goes both ways. You totally missed my point.

Edited March 8, 2012 by BlackCR25098

[Pontificus Maximus]

I would agree with the poster above that the mags have created this image that all Suzukis handle the same and they all handle great. Not at all true IMO. I haven't run across anyone associated with a MX magazine that has the technical skill to weigh a bike properly (being sarcastic) let alone the physical dimensions of a bike that greatly affect handling. Of course the manufacturers take advantage of this and can make up any spec they want and noone will even question it. Things like the rake, trail, overall weight, crank placement, center of gravity, seat height, weight ratio on wheels etc. can give you a fairly good indication of how a bike will handle. The numbers don't lie. My last Zook ('07 RMZ250) turned like a milk truck with a flat tire. That's because Suzuki raked the front end out on that model (only) and bikes with that much rake don't turn in well. I've got a KTM now and the turning is so much better it's not even comparable.